Opinions and Questions on Costs

[ltomuta]

I really like the concept of an app store like ovi. The only thing is this signing prob... Because it is not because of limited ram etc... It is because of money. Verising doesnt care what kind of app I sign but what I am willing to pay... I am not a fan of this kind of dubious business...

Nokia ron, like you i am looking forward to what the future will bring us. Perhaps unsigned apps in ovi

One thing that should be clear is the diference between signing and certification.

You are required to sign your application with a certificate issued by a trusted CA in order to authenticate that it is indeed your own application. It is similar to the signature you put on a letter, as long as the signature is recognized as being yours the recepient of the letter with trusts its content. But just like in a letter, the signature does not tell that the content is true (or that the app does not eat all the RAM it finds, to follow your example) but that it comes from you.

On the other side, the certification means that your application is signed by a 3rd part which guarantees with his signature not only that you have been verified to be the source of the content but also that the content is true (or for apps that they obay minimum quality criteria).

Now, one things I would expect to be true for a very long time: there will be no unsigned apps in the Ovi Store

[grahamhughes]

I appreciate entirely the need for Nokia to identify the source of Ovi content. As supplier (as the organization taking people's money) Nokia will have a set of legal obligations in most countries regarding the quality of good they supply, and possible liabilities for consequential losses resulting from dysfunctional software.

But an unfortunate choice on behalf of the MIDP-2 creators makes signing for J2ME apps problematic. An application that is signed, but where the devices does not recognize the signature, is not simply "untrusted" (as an unsigned app), but completely rejected.

Ron said earlier that signing is mandated by the operators, but this is contrary to my experience. Operators require certification (in Europe, predominantly JV, in the US it's more complicated). For the reasons Ron gave, this is entirely understandible. But any signatures that result from this (such as JV) are routinely removed before deployment. Signed Java builds cause too many problems, because there are too many devices that won't have the right certificate, resulting a customer support nightmare.

There is a thread in the Java Security forum regarding the issue of T-Mobile US devices. T-Mobile US devices don't have third-party certicates, so will reject all Verisign, Thawte or JV signed builds. There is an earlier post from pjohnsen regarding missing certificates from some Nokia devices (and it's safe to assume that Nokia perform better than other manufacturers, but since we're talking about Ovi, only Nokia matters).

So, I find it unlikely that the builds downloaded from Ovi will be signed. If they are now, that will soon change.

If so, there's no reason for builds submitted to Ovi to be signed with a certificate recognized by the device. Builds submitted for JV, for example, now have to be signed simply to verify the origin - the signature will stop the build from running, and will be removed before testing. Nokia could easily use a similar system (if such a system would be cheaper!). At least it might provide more options, and more competition in the market.

Cheers,
Graham.

[ltomuta]

I've managed to stay away from Java until now (and I hope to be able to do this in the future as weel) so I'm not aware of all the limitations particular to this area. It is however clear that there is a need for trust, in diferent levels, between Nokia and you as a business partner, and that would include the requirement for signing a delivery, or between the application and apps for certain sensitive features, and that would imply certification. My comment about "no unsigned apps in the Ovi Store" should be seen through this perspective, of trust, and not concrete signing although in Symbian world that is indeed mandatory.

The point of this discussion is, I believe, not to dream about removing all checks and tests, and creating a "free" market, but rather to find the right balance of the mechanisms used to generate the trust and making them work for developers rather than agains developers.

[grahamhughes]

I agree entirely. I'm a firm believer in the need for verification, both of developers and apps. Nokia's legal obligations to downloaders mean that it cannot make Ovi a free-for-all.

However, the current identity verification process raises concerns about cost with a lot of people. For Java developers, perhaps a bigger concern is one of device-compatibility. This latter issue can be resolved to some extent by removing the requirement that installation does not display an "untrusted" message, and opening up a wider range of signing options (which would also help to push prices down).

A single document listing the effects of different Java signing options on different device/operator combinations would be extremely useful.

Cheers,
Graham.

[Nokia Ron]

(My Opinion)
Costs are relevant,if you are writing for pleasure the cost of Ovi Store is not huge compared to other hobbies.

Want to go fishing, buy a rod and reel sit on a bank with a fishing license you still have $100 to $200 invested. Rent a boat or buy a boat your cost go up, buy a motor and it is higher. Compared to the cost of fishing publishing an application on Ovi Store it is economical.

I'm just saying lets take these costs into perspective.

Ron

[21n9]

Do we need a $500 cert to verify our identity and the fact that an app was made by us, surely my user name and password on the Ovi publisher login verifies my identity when I upload. Surely when I pay my €50 fee the bank verifies my identity.

Nokia are really hindering both the developers and themselves with this requirement, just quickly comparing the cost of the manufactures.

iPhone app store $99 (one off fee)

Android $25 (one off fee)
this is purely to verify your identity with a bank transaction, if the bank trusts you then so shall we sort of thing

Blackberry $20 (per app version )
this doesn’t include different versions of the same app or updates, for example if there was a game called “coloured blocks” and you did a version for the Blackberry Pearl and one for the Storm that would cost $40, further more if you release an update coloured blocks v 1.2 for example to address some minor bugs that another $40. (note you have to buy them in sets of 10 so $199 minimum)

Windows mobile $20 (per app) first 5. $99 (per app) there after
This includes multiple versions of the same app and updates

Ovi €50 (one off fee) then either $299 (per year) thawte or $499 (per year) verisign
Also be aware of the certificate issues Graham has cited you may have to buy both.


Now look at that list again and who is getting the most publicity and the most positive publicity on the web, (the web being the root of most of the modern media), iphone and Android are the ones getting all the attention and all the positive reactions from the development community, and they both have the lowest barrier to entry. coincidence???? I think not!

Its not to say iphone and android publicity is all positive but compared to the others they’re streets ahead both in terms of volume and positivity.
Of course we could harp on about the cost of buying a mac as a cost to entry for the iphone app store but it just isn’t, If you’ve already got a mac it isn’t, if you were thinking of getting a new computer anyway it isn’t. Then also when you consider the design and build quality and better OS than windows, it’s a completely separate investment in a tangible product, not a vaporous certificate which serves no other purpose, and you can’t sell on a certificate like you can a mac .
Anyway if anyone wants to be pedantic about it, what about the cost of a half decent pc, the cost of all the handsets you need, far more than 1 iphone and 1 ipod touch, there are 3 iphones but if you don’t go near the compass or video camera then you only need 1 as everyone has the latest firmware, which is the same for each devise. Anyway 3 is still less than 20+ Nokia handsets


What I strongly believe Nokia needs to do is vet the companies or individuals who sign up for the quality of their products, which they are already doing, this is just to weed out developers who’s content is below par, ie bejewelled clones who’s graphics have been put together in 5 mins with cheap photoshop layer styles. They only have to do this once, not for every app, saving them selves and the developers a lot of time and aggravation. A developer who puts together a polished product is unlikely to release a fart button app the following week.

Then the developer pays $99 (one off fee).

The developer submits their content, Nokia vets each version for basic stability and checks out the connections it makes for security and signs it themselves, with whatever certificate the app needs to work on those devise groups. This removes the cost to developers and the confusions of what cert to buy and how to sign the app without issues.

Nokia have done a lot to clear up the mess left by Java over recent years, getting rid of the odd screen sized devices, using the same JSR’s on large groups of handsets ect. But there’s still grime in the corners, signing confusions fragmented development tools ect. Nokia needs to break out the steam cleaner if they’re going to compete with Apple and Google.

[Nokia Ron]

There are merits to all the opinions and this is a free opinion thread. Nokia Values them as long as they continue to stay open discussions I will not hinder them.

I personally don't think you can include Java Verified costs into the cost of Ovi Store anymore than you should include the cost of a Mac into their costs. But that is my thought.

Ron

[21n9]

There are merits to all the opinions and this is a free opinion thread. Nokia Values them as long as they continue to stay open discussions I will not hinder them.

I personally don't think you can include Java Verified costs into the cost of Ovi Store anymore than you should include the cost of a Mac into their costs. But that is my thought.

Ron

Yep agreed it should be clear by now that Java verified it is no longer a requirement, signing still a big issue though when compared to the other app stores. Both in terms of cost and the technical issues it creates

[grahamhughes]

For me personally, cost is not the issue stopping me from jumping into Ovi. Babel Media are currently offering to JV apps across all Ovi supported devices "from £1000" (about €1000). To me, that's relatively little compared to the cost of my time developing a product in the first place. However, I wouldn't be happy going through that, only to repeat pjohnsen's experience (wait three weeks and then it fails for no apparent reason). And more importantly, I'm not confident I'd make the money back. I believe that too many low quality apps (to echo 21n9), and too much freeware, are going to mirror the Apple store's lottery, where you either get very, very lucky, or you don't make a penny.

Ovi is inherently more complicated than other app stores. It has to support two operating systems, one with native apps and both with Java (and not entirely compatible). Nokia also has a huge range of devices. I think developers are going to have to accept more costs than with Apple (such as the per-version charge, if you'll excuse the expression).

Graham.

[grahamhughes]

Sorry, before anyone corrects me, yes, passing Java Verified is not a requirement of Ovi. But I think that Ovi does require that apps be capable of passing JV, even though they don't have to be certified before submission. As I understand it, Ovi's internal testing requirements for Java apps are based on JV. It would be nice if developers had the option of bypassing Ovi's functional QA testing by using JV certification, allowing them a quicker time to market, and freeing up Ovi QA to clear their backlog.

Graham.

[Nokia Ron]

Time to market is improving, it is hard to believe but this has only been a month since it went public. Thanks for your patience and I understand why someone would wait until it gets better. I never go to a new movie on the first weekend either.

Ron

[ptgoce]

Hi - my first post on this forum...

I come here to find out the cost associated with developing and publishing apps on ovi store and reading around pretty much comes down to this: Post 66 of this thread

What got me is the response by Nokia Ron, and even more the responses by other Nokia representatives on this and other threads while trying to justify the complexity and cost associated with publishing apps on ovi store.

My take on this and I believe there is number of developers that would agree with me, Nokia:

1. Don’t be greedy, especially when Apple offers better deal!
2. Make it simple and affordable to publish apps, don’t forget you’ll be getting cut of our profits too (20 or 30%?)!
3. Stop using the cost of buys a Mac as excuse, it is not as we don’t have to buy PC which is not much cheaper if you consider the antivirus charges plus the facts that Vista needs more powerful machine to run. Not to mentioned number of Nokia devices for testing.
4. Stop using any comparison such as hobby to justify the cost – it is not your business how we spend our money. All you need to consider right now is Apple, let’s face it if it wasn’t for them you wouldn’t even have this store, so if you are planing for this store to be success, you have to offer something better than Apple, which is miles in front of you right now.
5. Don’t try to control (and consequently tell the users what they want) what sort of apps go in the store. If the user wants one button fart app, give to them or someone else will.

I'm considering which platform to port my apps to next and return on investment is a big thing. There is no way that you can convince me that your store is going-to be bigger success than the app store so why should I (and number of other developers) invest more...
Last word(s): KISS -> every developer should know what this means!

[ltomuta]

I think you should read again these posts, maybe you have misunderstood some things. Nobody is telling you what to do or not with your money, we're just discussing things trying to understand them better. At the end of the day the decisions is always yours, you invest or not in having your application released in the Ovi Store.

I'm not a publisher but if I were the only things that would matter for me are:
a) production cost per application release
b) how many copies of my app I would have to sell for my application to generate profit?
c) can the Ovi Store deliver me that minimum number of customers and a lot more?

With all the discussion here it should be now clear for everybody what the value of a) is to get to the Ovi Store. Would c) be satisfied? If yes, I would publish. If not, I would look for another market. You can't get more KISS than that.

[ptgoce]

Can you please be kind enough to point me to one page official Nokia summary of the steps and cost associated with getting an app to ovi store?

Also I couldn't figure out if using free version of QT for developing paid apps is okay?

[ltomuta]

Can you please be kind enough to point me to one page official Nokia summary of the steps and cost associated with getting an app to ovi store?

Also I couldn't figure out if using free version of QT for developing paid apps is okay?

I am not aware of such a page but the above posts should have all the clues you need. The cost varies mainly on the technology used.

Qt for S60 is currently not suitable for production but from a licensing perspective you do not have limitation on creating commercial apps. I'm not a lawyer though so you might need to consult one (which will increase you overal development cost).